How Hezbollah Responded to Israeli Attacks?

March 22, 2014

4 3 minutes read

‘Israel’ and the Wind of North

From the Mount Hermon blast to the explosive devises chain: new game rules set by Resistance.

Ibrahim al-Amin – al-Akhbar

Hezbollah Mujahedeen«No longer exaggeration to talk about the front emerged in the north», a statement of «Haaretz» newspaper commentator said, speaking on security developments in the occupied Shebaa Farms and the Golan. Perhaps the phrase is the most accurate one when describing the border reality of Lebanon-Syria-occupied Palestine triangle.

More than a year ago, Israel assessments regarding the northern front concluded that her movement is no longer restricted without being an entirely free hand. Estimates are strongly based on convincing the enemy that Bashar al-Assad in Syria, along with Hezbollah in Lebanon and Iran, are not interested in opening a front with Israel because of their preoccupation with the interior open Syrian crisis. This estimate has been strengthened over the past year after Israel raids on Syrian military positions , without any response from Damascus.

Israel, which acts like a spoiled boy, found it appropriate to set similar rules with Lebanon. But the estimate itself was significantly shook up after a raid last February on a Hezbollah site at the Lebanese-Syrian border.

Israel’s problem is not only the wrong assessment on the Syria or Hezbollah reaction against her continuing provocation, but also her belief in that things can be contained if she decided to act unilaterally. It is true that the enemy forces bombed Syrian sites off the occupied Golan, but Israel is aware that this bombardment will not change the new facts. The decisive fire message over the days directly indicates that it is no longer allowed to go unilaterally in deep interpretations of the ground reality.

Maybe Israel was in need to draw an operational attention which Hezbollah has done in different ways. But the attention Hezbollah drew was not only screaming or expletive, but «rubbing the ear» as well, forcing Israel to limited options: muting pain, screaming in order to resolve the problem or responding by a blow behind the scenes to force the other side to back down.

In practice, Israel bombed a Resistance site in the Bekaa border with Syria. She didn’t ignore Hezbollah statement that stresses the inevitable right of respond, but didn’t know where and how the response will be. Then the wheel moved on: A missile attack on a site near Mount Hermon and an attempt to plant explosive device at the borders of occupied Golan.

Hezbollah did not claim responsibility, but Israel accused him and hoped the operation was his own response. In this case, Israel is able to «deny», thus closing the game, but on the basis that the response is faint, which is a sign of weakness. Then the enemy assessment will be strengthened to possibly change the game rules.

Hezbollah knows Israel very well, and knows her more than necessary. He knows more about when she receives the message well and helps her to digest the message. Hezbollah even dragged Israel to operate in accordance with that message.

At this point, the Israeli pupil seemed in need to the second meal: A special commando unit of Hezbollah crossed all the measures, advanced inside the occupied Shebaa Farms and planted two explosive bombs. One blown up at the passing of leadership patrol, and the second was left for the soldiers so they could find it later.

The nature and strength of the bomb, and the nature of the second device, were arranged inside a mail compartment so Israel could know the identity of the sender.

Israel was embarrassed and responded by a strike in the air on a target in Odaiseh (southern Lebanese town on the border with Lebanon), but she also hoped the response had been completed.

Suddenly, Golan bomb went off. A perfectly-equipped bomb – as the Israelis said – and non-fatal injuries increase the uncertainty. This time the charge cannot be confined to Hezbollah, or more precisely, it cannot be said that it is Hezbollah for sure. But testing does not mean that Israel is able to keep silent. It responded by pounding the Syrian army sites bearing him the responsibility.

The enemy reaction accompanied with clear words of leadership and security sources that Assad opponents cannot be accused of being behind the attack. All know that Israel wants its share of the Syrian crisis. Fearing of chaos on border areas didn’t led her to adopt special procedures. Israel leaders say that during the three years, and after the presence of anti-Syrian regime armed groups close to the Golan Heights, not a single danger had hit Israel. But, today, she finds that there are those who open the door to a war of attrition that would return her to the Lebanese quagmire era, or even to the days before October War in 1973.

What if we encompassed the issue in a way that can benefit those who want to take advantage?

Israel recognizes that Hezbollah fighting in Syria is to support the allied regime, which means that Israel is aware of that Hezbollah is fighting to protect his Resistance. Israel also believes that Assad is not able – and not unwilling – to respond to the attacks for being busy in his domestic battle.

Based on this logic, it’s better for the enemy, as well as for those whom it may concern, to act one day after another on the grounds that Israel will be facing a bigger problem on its northern front. It is true that Syria and the resistance are unwilling to engage in war, but it is wrong to believe that they do not possess the force to fight it.

There was a huge mistake committed by Israel’s allies in the West and in the region which removed all obstacles hindering unification in the Syrian-Lebanese front facing them.